Mark Eade represented the fourth, ninth and tenth defendants, instructed by Cooper Grace Ward.
The plaintiff commenced proceedings seeking recovering of $150,000 advanced to the first defendant, alleging the funds were loans rather than investments, but the proceeding remained inactive for many years. The issue before the Court was whether leave should be granted to continue the proceedings and amend the statement of claim despite the delay, or whether the proceeding should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The Court granted leave for the claim to continue against the first defendant but dismissed the proceeding against the remaining defendants. Although the delay was extreme, the Court accepted that the plaintiff’s age, impecuniosity, health issues and self-represented status provided explanation, and that refusing leave would permanently prevent her pursuing the person alleged to have received and retained her money. In contrast, the claims against the remaining defendants were considered tenuous, significantly prejudiced by the delay, and lacking a sufficiently sustainable factual basis to justify continuation.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
